Answers to 21 Anti-Universalist Objections

Answers to 21 Anti-universalist Objections

Steve Jones

Objection 1: If universal restoration is true, why be a Christian now?

Answer: We ought to follow Jesus, first of all, because it is the right and good thing to do. Second, that we might enjoy a purpose in our existence, an abundant life, a freedom from the tyranny of evil and an escape from the mundane offerings of this world.

Objection 2: If all will be saved someday, why evangelize?

Answer: See the answer to the first objection.

Objection 3: Without the threat of endless hell, some people won’t respond to God or seek to do good. If universalism were revealed true, many Christians would give up the faith and live ungodly lives.

Answer: Such people are unworthy of the Christian name. They obey God as slaves under the lash, not as children seeking to live in the Father’s love. I refuse to allow them to drive my interpretation of human destiny.

Objection 4: Doesn’t justice demand that some people pay for their sins forever?

Answer: No. The wages of sin is death — we’ll all make that payment. But if God wishes to pardon all, what slight is that to His justice? I am commanded by Christ to forgive all who have offended me. Is that an injustice? If not, then why would it be unjust for God to do exactly what He expects of me?

Objection 5: The Bible contains language of exclusion. Some will “not see life” or have “no inheritance in the kingdom.” Others will “go away into eternal punishment.”

Answer: Yes, but the Bible also includes language of universal inclusiveness. Paul said that “every knee will bow” and “every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

Objection 6: True. But for the wicked, that confession will not come from the heart — only from the almighty, subjugating power of Christ.

Answer: A coerced confession would not be “to the glory of God the Father.”

Objection 7: Still, doesn’t a lot of Scriptural language rule out universalism?

Answer: Evidently not. Only a few centuries after Christ, we have records of many scholarly Christians who spoke the New Testament language, used the same “exclusionary” and “condemnatory” phrases found in its pages — yet, they were open universalists.

Objection 8: If the authors of Scripture were universalists, why didn’t they just say it plainly? Why do they write things so apt to be misunderstood?

Answer: The Psalmist wrote, “All flesh will bless his holy name forever and ever.” (Psalm 145:21) How much plainer can you get than that? The same kind of language occurs in the New Testament. It is true, however, that the Bible is not a universalist catechism or primer. The latter Scriptures give us a glimpse into the faith of the early church, but not a full explanation of everything Christians believed from the ground up. The New Testament is concerned mainly with (1) the proclamation of Jesus as Messiah, (2) the proclamation of the long-awaited kingdom of God, (3) the healing of problems in the early churches. It does not answer all our eschatological queries with unmistakable plainness. Besides that, Paul tends to be difficult to understand — even another biblical author thought so. (2 Pet. 3:15-16)

Objection 9: Aren’t you just projecting wishful thinking onto the Bible?

Answer: I may be. But a thing is not false simply because we would like it to be true. The Christian message is supposed to be good news. Why not embrace the best news possible?

Objection 10: What if you’re wrong about this? What if universalism isn’t true?

Answer: Well, then I’m wrong. Any person with an ounce of humility will consider this a real possibility about a given belief. No one is infallible. But if I am wrong, I would rather err on the side of mercy than wrath. I would rather be guilty of making God too loving than too condemning.

Objection 11: Doesn’t universalism minimize the seriousness of sin?

Answer: Jesus told us to forgive everyone who has sinned against us. Does that minimize the seriousness of sin?

Objection 12: What about sins that are “unto death” or that will never be forgiven?

Answer: It is within the power of God to punish these offenses without inflicting either eternal torment or annihilation.

Objection 13: If universalism is true, that means Hitler will enjoy the same eternity as the most pious saint.

Answer: Where sin abounded, grace abounded much more. That was the belief of Paul.

Objection 14: Are you denying that “it is appointed for men once to die, but after this the judgment”?

Answer: No. Some may have to face a fearful judgment on the other side of the grave and endure some retribution for what they have done. The universalist hope is that they will be reconciled eventually, that God may be “all in all.”

Objection 15: Isn’t the idea of reformation after death unbiblical?

Answer: No. It is biblically obscure, but not anti-biblical. Early Christians practiced a proxy baptism for the dead (1 Cor. 15:29). They also believed that after his crucifixion, Jesus preached to the dead imprisoned in hades (1 Pet. 3:19-20; 4:3-5). The Bible never tells us that it is “too late” for any change once we have died (contrary to the warnings of so many evangelists).

Objection 16: Jesus said that “God is able to destroy both body and soul in hell.” (Matt. 10:28) Doesn't that pretty much refute universalism?

Answer: To say that God has the power to do something is not the same thing as saying that He WILL do it. For example, John the Baptist declared that “God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.” (Matt. 3:10) No one expected that to happen, of course.

Jesus' utterance is part of a send-off to his missionaries who were ready to preach the kingdom of God and face severe opposition. The point was this: Do not be consumed by the fear of men, but instead fear the one who truly holds the power of life and death. It need not be viewed as a definitive statement of “what happens when non-Christians die.”

Objection 17: Won’t people live carelessly if you teach such a thing?

Answer: I can’t help that. People live carelessly under the threat of endless torments, too.

Objection 18: Doesn’t universalism encourage the unbiblical notion of the “immortality of the soul.”

Answer: Some universalists believe in the immortality of the soul (as do many non-universalists). Some don’t. My opinion is this: The eternal life to come will be the result of the resurrection, the gift of Christ — not some undying component in the human personality.

Objection 19: Most Christians throughout the course of church history — and even today — would strongly disagree with you on universalism.

Answer: Majority vote does not determine truth. More often, it’s the other way around.

Objection 20: Calvinists tell us that God does not love all people.

Answer: He surely must. Jesus told us to love all people, even our enemies, and to do good toward them. God’s love is perfect and, therefore, must surpass ours — not fall below it.

Objection 21: Won’t the inclusion of everyone diminish the significance of salvation for the saints?

Answer: Why would it? Generally speaking, a big party is better than a small one.

The Spirit Movie Trailer

Frank Miller + Will Eisner = Hot

Phillipians 2: 10-11

So when His name is called,
every knee will bow,
in heaven, on earth, and below.

And every tongue will confess
"Jesus, the Liberating King, is Lord,
to the glory of God our father (The Voice)

that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father. (NIV)

That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (KJV)

Here Paul is discussing how we should love one another and be servants towards one another, because Christ humbled Himself by becoming our servant unto death, and we ought to be willing to do the same for our fellow man.

But what does this last part mean? God exalts Christ above all so that everyone, on earth OR UNDER THE EARTH shall both bow and confess that Jesus is Lord.

Again, I take ALL to mean ALL. Every to mean every.

Even the people living at the center of the Hollow Earth. Everyone will confess that Jesus is Lord, which means, sooner or later, everyone is going to be at the party. See ya there :)

Victory Day in Iraq

An interesting perspective on the conflict in Iraq from the Gay Patriot:

By any and all accounts of measuring success (including the American liberals’ ever changing goals), we can finally mark the day that America can finally declare “Victory In Iraq.” A number of bloggers were declaring 11/22/2008 (last Saturday) as “V.I. Day” — and that date is as good as any.
But it was this week that, militarily and politically, the Armed Forces of the United States of America Officially Won The War In Iraq.

BAGHDAD — The long, costly story of American military involvement in Iraq moved closer to an end Thursday when Iraq’s parliament approved a pact that requires all troops to be out in three years, marking the first clear timetable for a U.S. exit since the 2003 invasion that ousted Saddam Hussein.

The vote followed months of talks between U.S. and Iraqi negotiators that at times seemed on the point of collapse, and then days of dealmaking between ethnic and sectarian groups whose centuries-old rifts had hardened during the first four years of the war.

Three United States heroes are primarily responsible for Victory In Iraq: General David Petraeus, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and the Commander In Chief, President George W. Bush.

However… the ultimate credit and praise goes to the nameless and faceless: The many, many American heroes in uniform (some still fighting; some never coming home), the American civil servants in the Green Zone, the countless Americans volunteering in Iraq out of compassion, and millions of ordinary Iraqis stepping up out of the dust clouds and raising their voices for freedom.

The War Against Islamic Fundamentalism is far from over. But the forces of evil suffered a known defeat in the sands of Iraq at the hands of Western liberal democracies. It wasn’t pretty — but war is hell.

AMERICA SHOULD BE VERY PROUD OF THE VICTORY IN IRAQ. Yes, it came at a terrible cost, as all marches toward freedom do. But history shall be the ultimate judge of how the Post-9/11 world is safer because Saddam Hussein was not a part of it.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Now personally, I feel we "won" the war the day that statue came down. On that day, Saddam's government was toppled, and the rest has been mop-up and rebuilding. The primary mission was accomplished, to be replaced by a new mission of nation building.

It is much easier to defeat an enemy than to build a new nation, and the past several years have proven that out.

Either way, I like Bruce's perspective on this, and found it well worth repeating.

In the spirit of Thanksgiving, thank you American warriors. Thank you to those Americans who supported them, and thank you to the President and the rest of our government who did whatever they did to bring about this victory.

Thanks and praise be to the God who watched over all of us. Annuit Coeptis

More Thanksgiving Fun

Thanksgiving just ain't Thanksgiving without Arlo Guthrie:

Happy Thanksgiving

A Good Article On Christian Universalism

Okay, I finally got my character to level 55 and made my Death Knight in WoW, so finally I may be able to begin posting again. To start things out I'll make up my usual Sunday posting on faith and the salvation of all with this adaptation of an article from the 1880s:

The Beauty of Christian Universalism

Christian Universalism appears to me very simple, consistent, and beautiful. It regards this world as God's, and the whole human family as His children. It accepts without distrust the fundamental fact of the gospel, that God, out of his great love to mankind, now alienated from him by sin, sent his only begotten Son to seek and to save that which was lost, and by redeeming men from sin, to restore them to their right relations with God, and thus fit them to glorify and enjoy Him forever.

It teaches that whatever mystery or difficulty there may be in the work of redeeming and saving souls, it is precisely the same in one and all. The truth, the grace, the love, the spiritual power, that can seize and transform one sinful soul, yours or mine, a Peter's or a Paul's is able to seize and transform all souls, for it can accommodate itself to all possible diversities of character and all conditions of life.

It is in virtue of this comprehensive power and fitness for the work it has in hand, that the gospel of Christ is qualified to be, and is to become, in fact, a universal religion. If there is one human soul in the universe that Christ cannot subdue and bring into willing subjection to his law, he is not "the Savior of the world," as inspiration proclaims him, and not the Savior the world needs.

Yet this redemptive work, let me add, is always carried on in perfect accordance with man's moral nature. Transcendent and divine as the power is, it operates in harmony with all human powers, so that, while Christ subdues our hearts to his will and brings them in subjection to his holy law, there is no violence done to our personality or our own will. We never act more freely than when we recognize the divine love, and sweetly yield our wills, ourselves, to its all-conquering power.

It was his prophecy and promise, as he stood in the immediate presence of the cross, that if he were lifted up from the earth, thus signifying by what death he was to die, he would draw all men unto himself (John 7:32). And this word "draw" expresses admirably the attractive forces of the Christian religion and Christ's method of accomplishing his work. Men are not driven to goodness and heaven, but are drawn thither. And we cannot properly consider the power of the divine love, as exhibited in the mission of Christ, without feeling convinced that it is sufficient to do all that Christ undertook. Prophecy assures us that he will not fail nor be discouraged in his work, but bring it at last to a glorious consummation.

As there is one God, who will have all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, so there is one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time (I Tim. 2:3-6). And that Christian seems to me weak in the faith who does not see in his Lord and Master a will, a love, a patience, a persistence, equal to the great work he came to do.

Nor do the various punishments which necessarily befall the sinner, whether here or hereafter, in any manner interfere with Christ's redeeming purpose, or interrupt the processes of his grace. On the contrary, they may always be, as we know they often are, the means of breaking the stubborn will, and so preparing the heart for the readier reception of the divine love and law. And as Christ in his history has experienced all the states of human existence, having sojourned and suffered in this world, descended into Hades, and ascended into heaven, that as the Apostle says, "he might fill all things," so he embraces in the arms of his redeeming power and love the whole human family in all their possible states of being, whether alive upon earth, or whether they lived before the flood, or are to live in the ages to come. He tasted death for every man, and is therefore to be the Savior of the world.

In the language of the Apostle we say, "Wherefore, God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father" (Phil. 2:9-11). And it needs no argument to show that universal homage to Christ and this confession of him as Lord can be nothing else than a personal and individual act. No man can make this confession for his neighbor and the Apostle elsewhere assures us that these acts of homage and allegiance can be performed in no other temper than that of profound sincerity. "No man speaking by the spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed; and no man can say that Jesus is Lord but by the Holy Ghost" (I Cor. 7:3).

In the realm of the spiritual, forms and ceremonies count little, and unmeaning or forced confessions, in which the heart does not utter its own feelings and convictions, count nothing at all. The Apostle, in declaring that every knee is to bow in the name of Christ, and every tongue to confess him Lord to the glory of God the Father, was surely not speaking of any mere outward service or any hypocritical homage, and quite as little of that confession which orthodoxy madly dreams will be extorted from the damned in hell.

The salvation of the whole human race is what God proposed in the creation. It is what Christ came into the world to effect, and for the accomplishment of which he was given all needed power in heaven and earth. To this end he died the death of the cross, and thus tasted death for every man; and I submit that such self-sacrificing love cannot suddenly cool, or readily give over to endless torment souls for which it thus willingly suffered.

I should be ashamed of myself, if, believing in God and in Christ, I still feared their ultimate failure in this great work of redemption, whose history fills the Bible. God never fails. I cannot associate failure with him even in thought. It is for him who inhabits eternity, and who is at once omniscient and omnipotent, to say, "My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure" (Isa. 46:10). And I beg those of the contrary part to reflect that the final issue of the divine government, whether it be in harmony with our theology or theirs, must be what God saw it from the beginning, and what, in his infinite wisdom and goodness, he himself proposed.

The above article was adapted, with slight editing, from the book "Endless Punishment In the Very Words of Its Advocates" by Thomas J. Sawyer, S.T.D., 1880

Some good stuff here, well worth pondering.

L.Neil Smith on Sarah Palin

I have long admired the books of libertarian sci-fi writer L. Neil Smith. People have often called him a proper heir to the works of Robert Heinlein, with his novels being full of fun-loving, gun-toting free thinkers. I'm not sure I would go that far, being I feel Heinlein's stature will probably never be matched, but I do love the guy's books.

He made some very interesting comments about Palin, liberals, and the election on his website:

Apparently liberals can't handle the idea of a woman with power if that woman isn't another liberal.

Enter Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. When Mad Jack McCain announced the choice he'd made of Palin as a running mate late last summer, I was delighted and surprised. It wasn't simply the only smart move the Hanoi Senator had made during his campaign, it was probably the only smart move any Republican had made since Eisenhower ended the Korean War.

High on the list of reasons I was delighted and surprised was that we'd have an excellent chance now to see clearly just how sisterly all those left-wing socialist feminists could be toward the third woman in American history likely to score herself a vote in the Electoral College.

The first, of course, being Tonie Nathan, a Libertarian.

What I saw and heard during the next three months exceeded even my wildest imaginings—and remember, I'm an imaginer by profession—a vitriolic spew of blind, visceral, dogmatic hatred that the nation's "progressives" hadn't lavished even on Randy Weaver, back when Ruby Ridge was in the headlines, nor on Timothy McVeigh after the explosion in Oklahoma City. Some feminists even claimed that, somehow, Palin wasn't a woman. Meaning, of course, that she dared to cherish values differing from those a woman, in their demented view, is supposed to cherish.

One so-called female so-called comedian referred to Palin as a "...little freaked out, intimidated, frightened, right-wing Republican, thin-lipped bitch", unintentionally describing herself by temperament, if not by political persuasion. She also warned the vice presidential candidate that she (Palin) would be gang-raped by her (the comedian's) "big black brothers" if she (Palin) visited Manhattan.

This to a real woman who, at least by implication, knows how to deal with a rapist the way a rapist ought to be dealt with, not with a little plastic whistle or a sisterly candlelight vigil, but with... well, let's just put it this way: there are places in Alaska where you're not allowed to venture unless you're carrying at least a .357 Magnum.

Same way the streets and subways of New York should be.

The so-called female so-called comedian also warned Palin to "stay away from the Old Testament", whatever that means, and referred to Palin's religion as "new goyish crappy shiksa funky bullshit!" Then, not realizing how funny she was being unintentionally, she added, "I'd just like [Palin] to explain to me how she can hold such outrageous views." I believe this calls for a new category of bigotry. How about "anti-Gentilism"?

Observers as disparate as freethinking liberal Camille Paglia and conservative Michael Barone have suggested that Palin became a target for bitter militant feminist hatred not simply because she opposes abortion, but because she declined to abort her own fifth child when she learned, in advance, that he would be afflicted with Down's Syndrome.

However not everything is about fetuses, and I believe there is a much wider and deeper reason that the left have unzipped and exposed themselves this way. There is a war going on, after all, between the so-called "dominant culture"—for which read the Parasitic Class—and the American Productive Class that clothes, feeds, and houses this country and much of the world and generally keeps the whole thing running.

The Parasitic Class decided for themselves long ago that we, the members of the Productive Class, should keep our places, work hard, turn over all our money to our "betters", and shut up. They, the Parasitic Class, for the most part alumni of Ivy League universities—alma maters of most of the morons who got us into, not only the current economic, military, and constitutional mess we find ourselves in today, but all of the economic, military, and constitutional messes of the 20th century, as well—would do the thinking, planning, and ruling.

Unannointed by such an Ivy League education or even the minimum requirement for membership in good standing in the Parasitic Class, a law degree (after trying other schools she graduated in media from the University of Idaho), Palin's an upstart, a usurper, a bounder, crimes that transcend even her protected status as a female. She isn't even from "Flyover Country"—nobody who's anybody ever flies over Alaska.

Perhaps as important, Palin isn't some pallid East-coast hotel dweller, accustomed to room service, but a real human being, a real live female who can do all of the things listed in the song "I'm A Woman"—she can handle a rifle, hunt, fish, clean and cut up wild game, make something edible out of it, keep house, raise five kids, keep her husband interested since they were in high school together, plus run a city and run a state—and most of the things any human being should be able to do, according to The Notebooks of Lazarus Long.

In short, she's a Heinlein woman.

That, I submit, is why she's hated by those females who are not Heinlein women, and by those Milquetoast males who are desperately afraid of the kind of real woman she is. That's why she was betrayed by her own party—Mit Romney's faction—which was the source, as it develops, of many of the most vicious falsehoods that were spread about her. That's why she's being blamed for McCain's pathetic failures, in an attempt to make sure she won't have a political future.

And that the peasants won't revolt.

The 2008 election is behind us now, a part of history, and the collectivists who triumphed are going to enjoy it while they can. The observations I've made here might be unimportant, except that, owing to the ascension of their god-king, we're going to be living with these animals for a while. In the end, it may be that the best thing Sarah Palin's candidacy accomplished is exposing them for what they are.

Gotta give props to Mr. Smith for his insightful commentary here.

/Hat Tip to the Libertarian Republican for this one.

Instead of the Usual Sunday Bible Study...

Been a real hard couple of days, grinding my tush off in WoW since the new expansion. here then in lieu of my normal Sunday sermon is something I pulled off of MMOFringe.com.

Commentary: All dogs go to heaven. God has reconciled the whole world in Christ, not just people and creatures with "souls." All existence "goes to heaven." Your pets, your rocks, and your pet rocks.

Watchmen Trailer

I am very much looking forward to this movie. One of my favorite graphic novels, I remember WAITING for these as Alan Moore first wrote them.